What movie did you last watch? - Page 38

spookypurple · 08-25-2005, 12:27 PM

"Love At First Bite" I just love that film. Was introducing some friends to it. "Children of da night ....... Shaddup!"

Soul_Immortal · 08-25-2005, 01:55 PM

I wanted to see that when it came out in theatres. Now its on DvD. Muahaha...

AlKilyu · 08-25-2005, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eyesofatragedy

I watched Sin City as well. I found it very captivating and fun to watch. Especially with all the eye candy.

The only thing that I didn't like was Jessica Alba's character is a damn stripper but all the other chicks are wearing less than her?? Where's the justice in this??!!

She is the poor little innocent girl from the begining, she didn't really belong there.

That movie was so faithful to the books it was amazing.

Panther · 08-25-2005, 04:50 PM

I know. I bought the Big Fat Kill just to compare. I was completly blown away at the accuracy. It's an incredible movie for all the things I judge on.

However, Sin City is an ideal comic to do that from, since it's broken up into unrelated (except by location and time) arcs. So it was a well chosen film all around.

Solumina · 08-25-2005, 06:21 PM

I saw Dukes of Hazzard...it was fun

Spazik · 08-27-2005, 01:27 AM

Dark City. It was pretty good. 8.3 out of 10

BoleroBelle · 08-27-2005, 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eyesofatragedy

Since I'm extremely lazy and hardly watch anything in theaters we rented Kung Fu Hustle. Holy flurking shit, I don't think I've laughed that hard in quite some time. A good portion of it is stupid funny but still funny none the less.

I love Kung Foo Hustle. i saw it twice in theatres. I feel bad for everyone that waited for DVD to see it. Some movies should be seen on the big screen.

Anyhow, i just saw Red Eye last night and i have to say, as thrillers go, i liked it. It was a bit unpredictable at some points. Nothing too flashy. No real make you scream moments, but i jumped a few times.

All in all, a fun movie!

MrMaelstrom · 08-27-2005, 09:42 AM

I watched Terry Gillians "Brazil" for the millionth time.

It's one of my all-time faves, alongside Apocalypse Now, 2001, Chungking Express and The Ghost In The Shell I and II (anime, I know, but definite cultural arse-kickers, both of them).

gingerbreadwench · 08-27-2005, 09:02 PM

I just saw The Skeleton Key. Despite its getting horrible reviews, I thought it was pretty okay. It was clever enough, and fairly well-acted. I'll give it a B-.

Loy · 08-31-2005, 07:41 PM

Mael-Trust me, the reviews I cram in are about 1/20th of what I see. Even if I posted more often, I'd still be like "oh shit, I CAN'T forget that film...."

Some more I've seen recently

"Splatter Farm"-OK, compile a list of every taboo subject that's in every horror film in existence. Now, give that list to the worst director you can find. Now, have said director hire the most inept actors he can pull away from the slow courses in high school. Have him shoot the thing on the worst quality VHS you could find in 1983 (and make sure it's the football tape...you know, the one that's been recorded over and over on), whilst forgetting certain unimportant members of a film crew (lighting guy, editor, etc), and you have this masterpiece.

"Cries And Whispers"-lesson #1- no matter what your girlfriends tastes in films are, and no matter how many times she's said "I wanna see a Bergman film" in the past, Bergman films are not, I repeat, absolutely NOT ideal date films, especially when said girlfriend is suffering from the monthlies. lesson # 2-Bergman is one of the geniuses of cinema. lesson # 3-"Cries and Whispers" is his very best film, period.

The cinema of Bergman is about seeing, but not in the observatory way that Abbas Kiarostami's cinema is about "seeing", but in a harsh unblinking mode of observation. We watch people as they grapple with all kinds of philosophical conundrums, and witness all the emotions these (in actuality, very basic) questions bring about. Bordering on the sadistic in his unwavering kino-eye (long takes, static shots, few edits, etc), some could (and have) wondered how any fan of his could claim that Bergman is one of cinemas greatest giants, since ,ost cinema is based on the concept of movement.

Though I'm nowhere near an expert on Bergman, I have seen a lot of his films, and here's what I have to say-whilst it's true that movement is a basic component of cinema (and really, all art. Including painting, sculpture, etc, but that's a discussion I'll have later), that doesn't neccesarilly mean that the movement has to be external and on display for the viewer. And this is where Bergman has been a trailblazer-with his films, Bergman made it OK to ask "serious" questions, and by refusing to allow the audience to know the inner thoughts of the characters on screen, Bergman created a way of portraying internal thought, internal action....the movement of the soul.

Some have claimed that Bergman is a gloomy, pretensious Swede, and whilst I can agree, it's only up to a point-no matter the Kierkegaardian nature of his works, his films still have that one basic element of all great art-it moves you. His stylistic tics aren't just "look at me, I'm a film-maker" posturings, but him trying to find the bast way to allow the audience a vantage point of the internal movement I mentioned earlier.

"Cries And Whispers" is, in my estimation, his greatest film (though I could equally say that the mind-fuck of "Persona" could equally fit that bill), and it also happens to be his darkest. At the turn of the century, two sisters and a maid give company to a sister who is on the verge of death.

From this simple premise Bergman (well, not really, but I'll get to that in a bit) has crafted one of the most paiunfully searing explorations of all his philosophical ponderings-the death of the spirit, the absence of God, the inability for people to fully interect with each other, the inherent loneliness of existence. By refusing plot (and here's a truth most film viewers don't seem to get-great films never rely on "plot", and fairly often don't have one.), and sticking with a premise, B and company use flashbacks to give the viewer a bit more color to work with, but the nature of the characters is totally created by us.

I mentioned the word "color", and not so flippantly. See, here's the amazing thing about this film-there was no script. The closest thing to a "script" was a letter Bergman wrote to the actresses and film crew (something along the lines of "I have this idea for a film, it takes place at the turn of the century, and I want to focus on the colors red, white, and black"). In other words, every gesture, every set-up, every line originates from everybody except Bergman. Yet why is his name in the credits as a "director"? Simple-he got his cast and crew to think about what they were creating, and provided them a guiding light in the creating process. In other words, he worked equally with all the players, but was the starting point for their trip.

And no matter how much I can type about this film, it all boils down to this-There are two types of crying that I do for films. One is a farced cry, that comes about because my heartstrings have been yanked on, and I hate this type of crying because it's been forced out of me. Then there's the other type of crying....the type that comes not from the film (or album....certain songs by Charlie Parker bring tears to my eyes), but from realising/discovering a part of myself. Now this doesn't mean that the film is yanking on my heart, but it's allowed me to peer into my soul so completely that it becomes overwhelming. And when I cry because of this, I'm filled with a joy of existence. I cried this way for "Wings Of Desire". For "Pickpocket". For "Au Hasard Balthasar". For "Raging Bull". For "Taste Of Cherry". For "Tokyo Story". For "Ghost Dog". And for a lot of films you've probably never heard of. However, I have never cried so completely, so honestly, or so openly as I have for "Cries And Whispers". If that isn't the definition of "great cinema", then I don't know what is.

Loy · 08-31-2005, 08:01 PM

yeah Mael, that was for you.

dreamydancer · 09-01-2005, 07:12 PM

Quills. It was the millionth time I watched it. Yet I've never read any of the Marquis de Sade's novels. Mmm, I should probably order some second hand ones on Amazon.com. (I think I'd feel a little embarassed to purchase dirty novels from a book store.) I hope they aren't disappointing.

Kettu · 09-01-2005, 07:14 PM

the blaire witch project. I had the idea that maybe it would get better with age, like wine...i was dead wrong.

Dark Screwed-up Mind · 09-01-2005, 07:57 PM

Skeleton Key

it was an ok movie but i liked the whole hudu thing

Fuckedup · 09-02-2005, 03:54 PM

i didnt watch it all, seen it before but
Road Trip
funny film

xx_i_like_black_xx · 09-07-2005, 04:31 PM

"the nightmare before christmas". tim burton is awesome.

Spazik · 09-07-2005, 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xx_i_like_black_xx

"the nightmare before christmas". tim burton is awesome.

Hey, I remember watching that movie in theaters when I was your age. It rocks!

Binkie · 09-08-2005, 08:18 PM

XXX: State of the Union:
More of a rant than a review

Just as a short foreword/explanation; an M203 is a 40mm grenade launcher (usually mounted under M4 and M16 variants), while the standalone version is essentially the basic launcher with a pistol grip and (usually) an extending stock.

Could prove to be appropriate for MOUT (Military Operations on Urban Terrain), but not in a situation where say, you're using it to breach on a narrow passanger train that not only has the President of the United States on it, but is traveling at speeds that are surpassing 200 mph. Sounds like common sense, huh? Not to whoever wrote "XXX: State of the Union," because that's a scene right out of the movie.

Towards the end of the film, Ice Cube (supposedly playing an ex-Navy SEAL) hops aboard a train traveling at 200 mph from another moving vehicle (because apparently his modified car's wheels were designed to coincide exactly with the set track guage used by the Presidential Evac Train... which of course runs adjacent to the highway so terrorists can't reach it), then pulls out his standalone M203 and begins room clearing with it like it was a small arm pistol. So let's evaluate the logic behind this move; of all the weapons he could have used to breach doors and clear tiny rooms with on a train that contains a VIP that can't be compromised, he chooses a handheld 40mm grenade launcher. Not only is he endagering himself, but obviously that weapon is going to be useless if the President is (and will likely be in this situation) in close proximity to his armed captors.

Perhaps the writer thought that anything with a pistol grip could be used as a formidable sidearm in a CQB situation, especially those with fragmenting rounds. I wondered where he got that idea until I remembered Vin Diesel answering that question in the first movie with the line, "Dude, you got a bazooka! Stop thinking Prague Police and start thinking Playstation!"

.....

Okie Dokie.

Of course, that same scene from the first film raises the logical question again of, "Why in the world did someone decide to carry a Stinger-type weapons system into a CQB environment?"

But anyways, when I first realized what Cube was clearing rooms with, I was hoping like hell that one of the "bad guys" would pop out of nowhere with a Kurz and force Cube's character to quickly realize the error of his choice in weaponry. That, or to have him aimlessly breach a locked door with it and catch the President in a vital area with loose shrapnel. But alas, he's conveniently unable to work in a chance to use his hostage rescue-friendly 40mm hand cannon. Oh well, maybe in the third film we can see the next XXX run and gun with an RPG-7 in an even tighter area.

AlKilyu · 09-09-2005, 11:58 AM

Dammit. With the 'Ask Loy' thread mysteriously gone, I have no way of finding out a movie I'm looking for I remember seeing yeeeears ago on cable. It was Italian, pretty sure Goblin did the soundtrack to that one too, and featured a scene where a little girl get's locked in a room in a morgue with a corpse on the table. A jar of acid drops on the corpse and the mixture of acid and melted face starts flowing onto the floor, creeping towards the feet of the little girl.

DANGIT that was so creepy and now I can't remember the name.... >_<

punkirony · 09-09-2005, 07:24 PM

I watched Constantine. Good film.

Sorry about your movie remembering situation AL. And long time no see!

MrMaelstrom · 09-10-2005, 11:00 AM

Just admit it Binkie, you gotta hard-on for firearms, do you not?

Why, I don't see why a bazooka wouldn't be quite appropriate in a close quarters battle. You could swing it on someone's head and then....er....then you could use the M203 to blow up enough things to clear the area for the use of the bazooka, see?

You obviously know nothing of battle strategy...tsk tsk...

MrMaelstrom · 09-10-2005, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loy

yeah Mael, that was for you.

And I damned well read it all, you bastartd.

Thank you for the recommendations (and Tstone's as well)

Jane13 · 09-10-2005, 11:52 AM

Back on page 5 I had a hypothesis for a formula involving exorcist films. It whent something like this (with slight variations on potency)- Good, Bad, good, bad, good, bad... and so on. My hypohesis on observation was correct in theory when all I had to work with was The Exorsist (good), The Exorcist II (bad), the Exorcist III(good) and Exorcist: The Begining (oh... so bad). Now my findings seem to be correct upon observation of this new "Exorcism of Emily Rose". I thought it was a freaking cool movie. Unfortunately if I am correct, I'll probably end up sitting through a crappy exorcism movie before the next good one comes out...

Empty_Purple_Stars · 09-10-2005, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jane13

Back on page 5 I had a hypothesis for a formula involving exorcist films. It whent something like this (with slight variations on potency)- Good, Bad, good, bad, good, bad... and so on. My hypohesis on observation was correct in theory when all I had to work with was The Exorsist (good), The Exorcist II (bad), the Exorcist III(good) and Exorcist: The Begining (oh... so bad). Now my findings seem to be correct upon observation of this new "Exorcism of Emily Rose". I thought it was a freaking cool movie. Unfortunately if I am correct, I'll probably end up sitting through a crappy exorcism movie before the next good one comes out...

Hey Pretty!!

Long time no see..

How have you been?

Did you have your surgery?

Hope you plan on sticking around..

We missed you around here..

FenrisQueen · 09-11-2005, 12:47 AM

I went to see the Cave with some friends like six hours ago. I didn't like it at first, because frankly I had wanted to see Underclassman, bad taste conneisseur that I am. But it was pretty good after I quit being a moody bitch. I'm just happy I talked my friends out of seeing The Excorcism of Emily Rose, because, a) I'm a wimp, and b) the preview had me freaking out.